Measuring PR: Outputs - the first essential step July 2003 Everyone has to justify their actions. And every department in a corporation has to justify its contribution to the business result. For many departments this is quite simple, because their role is clearly defined and their contribution equally obvious. And that’s one of the problems facing the measurement of PR activities. Too few people in the organisation understand what it is that PR is trying to achieve. It can also be argued that many PR people themselves don’t question what they are trying to achieve and therefore face difficulties in measuring what they do. For some, it’s like the person in the exhibition booth who reports that it was a great exhibition because they got rid of all their brochures. Measurement of PR essentially falls into three categories: Outputs - measuring the effectiveness of the work done. Who did we reach? Did it convey the right messages? Was it done cost efficiently? Outcomes - measuring changes resulting from our communication. Did we create greater awareness? Did we change attitudes? Did our target audience change their behaviour? Business results - how did the PR help the organisation achieve its business objectives? Measurement is currently a hot topic in the US where there is a whole industry of individuals and firms selling measurement tools - and most of them relate to measurement of outputs. Some are selling science and others, technology. Others still are forming alliances between science and technology, as with the recent deal between Biz360 and CARMA International. This alliance was driven by a need to be able to deliver research with analysis rather than just one or the other. But while these many vendors are competing with each other over whose science or technology is the best, a core argument about how measurement results should be presented remains largely unaddressed. While some say it’s Share of Voice, others are saying it should be Share of Discussion (Share of Voice plus tonality). And how do you present the findings? Compounding this is the fact that top management is used to dealing in reports that give $ values. This level of management in general, and particularly marketing executives, would be happy to see a report expressed in terms of Advertising Equivalents (AVE). But AVEs have been frowned upon for years within the PR industry (see ‘Measuring PR success - AVE’s rejected'). In this article we look at the measurement of outputs. It’s a discipline that should be an integral part of every PR program. And setting up and running a measurement system that is attuned to a specific company, product or issue is not difficult. Here is a range of Media Output measurement options to consider: Impressions - Readership (as opposed to circulation) of clips Value - the equivalent advertising value of media coverage Cost - the cost per media impression or the cost per thousand of a campaign Frequency - number of times we gained exposure Reach - the degree of coverage across our target audiences Prominence - how and where the coverage occurred within specific media Message delivery - did the story deliver specific pre-determined messages? Tone - was the story positive, neutral or negative? Share of Ink - total amount of coverage devoted to a topic Share of Voice - percentage of coverage devoted to a client or product compared with competitors. In addition there is a range of other measurement criteria than can be applied to other activities in a program. For example: Functions. How many attended? What was the ratio of acceptances to total invitations? What was the acceptance rate by type of invitee? What was the cost per attendee? Web sites. How many accessed our web site as a result of our communication? What sections did they go to? How long did they stay? A mix of measurement techniques can be devised for each situation. However the criteria by which measurement is undertaken can vary widely. Multinationals typically have their own template in place - but it’s not uncommon for variations to be needed to reflect the Australian environment. The actual measurement requires a range of tools and/or disciplines. Some are simple and others more sophisticated. Some you can easily do yourself and others may need to be bought in. And in some instances you may only need external advice at the beginning and end of the project, or your annual program. However the key to successful measurement is in the advance preparation. Communication professionals need to debate and discuss the various methodologies with those they report to so that meaningful objectives can be set. Many executives will be surprised how measurable PR output can be. And they may be even more pleasantly surprised if the communications professional not only volunteers this measurement, but also comes with a carefully constructed approach to it. In the July 2004 PR Influences looks at measuring outcomes. Network Communications, the publisher of PR Influences, is experienced in advising on, and implementing, output measurement techniques. Click here if you would like to discuss measurement with them. For additional reading see: Media coverage: forget about the quantity - measure the quality

PR Influences Australian Public Relations Newsletter. Article: Measuring Public Relations Results: Media measurement. Information Content: Measurement & Evaluation